JFK Assassination Documents to be released this year

[Doctored Whatsit]

In a 4 part CBS series from June 1967 called The Warren Report Connally said this:

"The only way that I could ever reconcile my memory of what happened and what occurred, with respect to the One-Bullet Theory is .... it HAD to be the SECOND bullet that might have hit us both."

In the same programme he also said:

All I can say, with any finality, if the Single-Bullet Theory IS correct, then it had to be the second bullet that hit President Kennedy and me."


Hardly conclusive here is he Fishy?

To be fair to Connally, he always said that there were definitely just three shots fired, all from the direction of the TSBD, and that it was the second shot that hit him. At the moment the first shot was fired, he had his back to JFK, so logically he assumed that it was the first shot that must have hit the President, because he couldn't have seen it happen. It must have seemed to have been the most likely consequence. However, if the first shot missed, then if he is correct that it was the second shot hit him, then the second shot hit both of them. They were aligned in a direction that such would have been inevitable.

So if Connally was wrong, it was merely his assumption that was wrong, and not his knowledge.

[Herlock Sholmes]

To be fair to Connally, he always said that there were definitely just three shots fired, all from the direction of the TSBD, and that it was the second shot that hit him. At the moment the first shot was fired, he had his back to JFK, so logically he assumed that it was the first shot that must have hit the President, because he couldn't have seen it happen. It must have seemed to have been the most likely consequence. However, if the first shot missed, then if he is correct that it was the second shot hit him, then the second shot hit both of them. They were aligned in a direction that such would have been inevitable.

So if Connally was wrong, it was merely his assumption that was wrong, and not his knowledge.

Exactly Doc. He was assuming that the missed shot struck Kennedy.

[Herlock Sholmes]

What kind of conspiracy would be reliant on ensuring that they can collect every bullet fragment? What if a bystander had picked up half a bullet and only revealed it at a later date proving that there must have been a fourth shot? It makes no sense. No group of conspirators would have left themselves so open to disaster. Then they have to fake an entire autopsy including x-rays? Then they have to rely on no witnesses capturing a GK on camera or film. These are the questions that conspiracy supporters never want to confront for very obvious reasons. No conspirators would have undertaken the kind of conspiracy that is being suggested.

Note too that when the concept of ‘crossfire’ being the best or even an accepted method of assassination was questioned, not one example of a crossfire assassination could be given. A conspiracy wanting an efficient kill, the least chance of being discovered, and the fewest people involved in an ‘on the inside’ position would have used a single highly skilled gunman, one shot, from a position where there was no chance of being disturbed, method of escape provided.

[Fiver]

Plus, the men who handled what became CE399, ALL COULD NOT, WOULD NOT AUTHENTICATE THAT BULLET AS THE ONE THEY HANDLED...

So how can CE399 be the SBT whan none of those who had it can identify it?

Lets look at the chain of custody.

* Parkland maintenance employee Darrell Tomlinson finds the bullet by complete luck. He gives the bullet to OP Wright. When shown CE 399, Tomlison says "it appears to be the same one" but he "cannot positively identify the bullet".
* Parkland personnel officer OP Wright gives the bullet to Richard Johnsen. When shown CE 399, Wright "stated that it looked like the one he gave to Johnsen on 11/22/63, but he could not positively identify it."
* Secret Service agent Richard Johnsen gives the bullet to James Rowley. When shown CE 399, Johnsen "stated that he could not identify that slug as the one he
received from Wright and gave to James Rowley".
* Secret Service head James Rowley gives the bullet to Elmer Todd. When shown CE 399, Rowley "advised he could not identify this bullet as the
one he received from . . . Johnsen and gave to . . . Todd".
* FBI Agent Elmer Todd marks his initials on the bullet. Elmer Todd gives the bullet Robert Frazier. When shown CE 399, Todd positively identifies it "from initials marked thereon".
* FBI firearms expert Robert Frazier, when shown CE 399, positively identifies it because "It has Frazier’s mark on it."

Obviously, the Parkland employees didn't know the way to be able to positively identify an object was to make a distinctive mark on it in a way that does not interfere with lab examination of the evidence. I don't have enough information to tell if the Secret Service should have, The FBI did.

What kind of Conspiracy is so inept that they plant a bullet where it was only found by blind luck?

What kind of Conspiracy is so inept that they plant the wrong bullet and have to frantically intercept and switch it for the correct bullet?

And as repeatedly pointed out, the stretcher bullet (CE 399) was conclusively matched to the bullet fragments taken from Connally's wrist (CE 842).

[Fiver]

How very stubborn of you.

Facts are stubborn things. Your statements bore no resemblance to actual law.

No crime if no evidence of a crime. The body is the evidence.

The body did not cease to exist because it was flown out of Texas. All evidence gathered from the Bethesda autopsy would be admissible in court. So would the fingerprint evidence. And the ballistics evidence. And the photographic evidence. And the documentary evidence. And the eyewitness evidence.

And that's before we consider the far stronger evidence that Oswald murdered Officer Tippit.

[Fiver]

Well why the hell didn't Oswald fire at jfk as he was coming right towards him from Houston st ? . This was the perfect time ,its literally a no miss , no escape for a even ordinary shot sniper.

Even better still ,the turn from Houston into Elm st put the limo so close to the tsbd Oswald could nearly put the rifle at jfk head point blank. Seriously who ever fired from that building ,if his intent was to kill the president this is surely a monty for that result , a ten year old Texas farm boy could have pulled that off with ease.

But wait there's more Oswald waits till the limo is driving away from him and fires his first shot some 150 meters down the road. !!!!

Firing at a steep downward angle is much less accurate. Firing at an approaching vehicle requires leading the target more, which is less accurate. Firing while JFK was approaching would make the shooter easier to spot and make it harder to escape.

Firing from the 6th floor straight down when the limo was turning would require leaning out the window in a poorly braced or unbraced position, which is very inaccurate and leaves the shooter extremely exposed to both identification and return fire.

But you don't believe Oswald was the shooter, so lets turn your question back at you.

If shooting at JFK as he was approaching the Book Depository was a good idea, why didn't the Conspiracy shooter do it?

If shooting at JFK while the limo was turning from Houston into Elm, why didn't the Conspiracy shooter do it?

[Fiver]

That the bullet was pristine is a myth. The evidence of the bullets has been provided so I really can’t see why you are asking for it.

A grassy knoll gunman who fled quicker than Usain Bolt and left zero trace of his existence still, apparently, had time to look around, find, and pick up the casing. Do you think that makes ‘sense’?

The Grassy Knoll shooter doesn't just have to flee undetected, he has to do this while carrying a rifle. In broad daylight. In an area swarming with police.

[Fiver]

Note too that when the concept of ‘crossfire’ being the best or even an accepted method of assassination was questioned, not one example of a crossfire assassination could be given. A conspiracy wanting an efficient kill, the least chance of being discovered, and the fewest people involved in an ‘on the inside’ position would have used a single highly skilled gunman, one shot, from a position where there was no chance of being disturbed, method of escape provided.

Well, no example of a successful crossfire assassination.

That's what a dozen assassins attempted in 1962 against Charles De Gaulle. 187 shots fired. 14 hit De Gaulle's vehicle.

Total dead - zero.

Total injuries - a random bystander was lightly wounded and Madame De Gaulle got a small cut on her hand brushing broken glass off.

Some of the Conspirators were caught. One talked. Ten were arrested. Six fled the country and were tried in absentia. One committed suicide, one was executed, the other 14 were sentenced to death or long prison terms.

This was a total failure at both getting away and getting the target. Yet the Conspiracy not only thinks this is a great idea to copy, they try to frame a lone gunman, which requires dozens more to be in on the Conspiracy to fake evidence.

Who's running this Conspiracy; Moe Larry, and Curly?

[Herlock Sholmes]

The Grassy Knoll shooter doesn't just have to flee undetected, he has to do this while carrying a rifle. In broad daylight. In an area swarming with police.

Unless he’d concealed it in a Dallas Curtain Rail Store bag of course Fiver.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Well, no example of a successful crossfire assassination.

That's what a dozen assassins attempted in 1962 against Charles De Gaulle. 187 shots fired. 14 hit De Gaulle's vehicle.

Total dead - zero.

Total injuries - a random bystander was lightly wounded and Madame De Gaulle got a small cut on her hand brushing broken glass off.

Some of the Conspirators were caught. One talked. Ten were arrested. Six fled the country and were tried in absentia. One committed suicide, one was executed, the other 14 were sentenced to death or long prison terms.

This was a total failure at both getting away and getting the target. Yet the Conspiracy not only thinks this is a great idea to copy, they try to frame a lone gunman, which requires dozens more to be in on the Conspiracy to fake evidence.

Who's running this Conspiracy; Moe Larry, and Curly?

They were just committee members Fiver, along with Laurel and Hardy, The Chuckle Brothers, Basil Brush and Mr. Bean. Chief Executive Officer, Chief Inspector Jacques Clouseau, Finance Officer, Olive from On The Buses, Head of Communication, Professor Stanley Unwin and Head of Planning, Eccles from The Goon Show.

No wonder the WC were fooled.

[Fiver]

Show evidence the fragments in jfks "head" were from a bullet fired from the rifle found in the tsbd. ?

Neutron analysis showed that the lead fragment found in JFK's head (CE 843) matched the bullet fragment from the front seat cushion (CE 567).

CE 567 still had part of the metal jacketing, so it could be compared to test bullets fire from Oswald's rifle.

Testimony Of Robert A. Frazier. Frazier was able to compare the markings of shell casing of bullets fired from Oswald's rifle with the shell casings found in the sniper's nest (CE 543, CE 544 and CE 545). All three matched the test casings. Frazier was able to compare the markings on bullets fired from Oswald's rifle with the markings on the stretcher bullet (CE 399), the bullet fragment from seat cushion (CE 567), and the bullet fragment from front seat (CE 569). All three matched the test bullets.

Affidavit of Charles L. Killion. Killion did independent testing and agreed with all of Frazier's conclusions.

Testimony of Joseph D. Nichol. Nichol did independent testing and agreed with all of Frazier's conclusions..

Testimony of Donald E Champagne. Champagne did independent testing of the shell casings and agreed with all of Frazier's conclusions.

Testimony of Andrew M Newquist. Newquist did independent testing of the bullet and bullet fragments and agreed with all of Frazier's conclusions.

[cobalt]

That's what a dozen assassins attempted in 1962 against Charles De Gaulle. 187 shots fired. 14 hit De Gaulle's vehicle.
Total dead - zero.
Total injuries - a random bystander was lightly wounded and Madame De Gaulle got a small cut on her hand brushing broken glass off.
Some of the Conspirators were caught. One talked. Ten were arrested. Six fled the country and were tried in absentia. One committed suicide, one was executed, the other 14 were sentenced to death or long prison terms.
This was a total failure at both getting away and getting the target. Yet the Conspiracy not only thinks this is a great idea to copy, they try to frame a lone gunman, which requires dozens more to be in on the Conspiracy to fake evidence.

There is no connection whatsoever in tactics between the de Gaulle assassination attempt and what is alleged by CTs happened in Dallas.

However for the benefit of our assassination gurus, here are a couple of kidnap/assassinations which very much imitated the de Gaulle attempt. The 1978 kidnap in Rome of former premier Aldo Moro was in many ways a carbon copy. It involved four cars, two for the ambush, and around 11 attackers. The difference was in lethal efficiency. All 5 security officers (in two cars) were killed whilst Moro was kidnapped uninjured. Of the 91 shots fired, 45 hit their intended target. Moro was, as many of us will remember, executed by his kidnappers, the Red Brigades, after 55 days.

A year earlier Hans Martin Schleyer, spokesman for West German industrialists, had been kidnapped in similar fashion by the Red Army Faction (often dubbed the Baader-Meinhof gang) when driving through Cologne. The victim's car was blocked in similar fashion. This time there were believed to be a mere 5 attackers assisted by a female member as decoy. Again the target was kidnapped uninjured and it seems his attackers drove off in a single van. As in the Moro kidnapping, the 4 security personnel (in two cars) were killed on the spot this time by a fusillade of 20 shots. Schleyer was executed after 43 days in captivity.

So lets not compare oranges with apples. First of all, no one has ever claimed mobile cars were used to shoot JFK. And secondly, and more importantly, the de Gaulle assassination failed while the JFK, Moro and Schleyer actions succeeded to lethal effect. Our JFK assassination gurus' wise saws might have been welcomed by the de Gaulle conspirators, but are hardly needed by the others.

[Herlock Sholmes]

So doesn’t ’not comparing apples and oranges’ apply when you are comparing kidnappings to an assassination attempt?

[FISHY1118]

What about the people that were there who don’t agree with your opinion and who don’t support conspiracy? I can’t see the point of you taking that kind of moral high ground as if you are being sensitive to the feelings of those around at the time. You are simply cherrypicking the ones that you feel support your point and then finding excuses to dismiss or ignore the inconvenient.

Ill ask again…and I’m guessing that this will be a perfect illustration of a conspiracy theorist avoiding and question - you consider Connally trustworthy on the issue of whether he was or wasn’t struck by the same bullet as Kennedy. Therefore do you allow him equal trustworthiness when he stated as a fact that there were only 3 shots and that they all came from behind?

He as many others did, directly contradict the Warren Commission findings . Whether you like it or not thats a fact , No one as yet been able to prove any of the Dr's at parkland hospital, Connally, nurse bell, witnesses who claimed there was a hole through and through the presidential limousine,( not a crack) people who claimed the limousine came to a complete albeit a brief stop along elm st. The list of contradictions and inconsistencies is staggering.

Yet because of some mock trial where most of the above ( probably none of it ) was ever put to a jury ,whom would have sent Oswald to the electric chair with the knowledge that in their minds, all of the above mentioned people either lied ,were mistaken , absolute morons , or never existed.

Oswald would never in a million years be convicted of jfks murder.

The truth is coming .!

[FISHY1118]

This is part of for the course Fishy. The problem is that none of the ‘what if’s’ or ‘why didn’t he’s’ every get answered. And yet here you are asking a question. I’m afraid that it’s always the conspiracy side demanding answers (which are given) and yet we are often faced with a yawning silence or a bit of side-stepping.

I was merely making the same comparison herlock as you use , quite a lot i might add .

And you comfirmed my point ,Thank you

As I said I don't like the "what if " . But on the very rare occasions will throw one in to demonstrate that point of view.